Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making.
Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/acm.0b013e3181cd1cc5
复制
发表时间：
2010-03
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Devenport LD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Antes AL;Wang X;Mumford MD;Brown RP;Connelly S;Devenport LD
通过评估在应对伦理问题和伦理决策所涉及的基本过程中所做出的决策的道德性，来研究现有的负责任的研究行为（RCR）课程对伦理决策的影响。这些过程包括个人如何思考道德问题（即，元认知推理策略）和对伦理问题的社会维度的强调（即，社会行为反应）。2005-2007年，发布了招聘公告，声明正在进行一项全国性的在线研究，以审查RCR指令对科学家道德决策的影响。招聘产生了200多名RCR教师在21所研究型大学和医学院的接触; 40（20%）RCR教师报名参加了他们的课程，在目前的研究。在这些课程中，173名参与者完成了道德操守决策措施。出现了一种混合的影响模式。决策的道德性并没有改善，作为RCR指令的结果，甚至减少了与研究的业务方面，如合同投标的决定。课程参与者在一些元认知推理策略上有所提高，如对情况的认识和对个人动机的考虑，但在寻求帮助和考虑他人观点方面有所下降。参与者也增加了对有害社会行为反应的认可，如欺骗，报复和逃避个人责任。这些研究结果表明，RCR指令可能不像预期的那样有效，事实上，甚至可能是有害的。如果教学导致学生过度强调回避伦理问题，过度自信自己处理伦理问题的能力，或过分强调自己的伦理本质，可能会产生有害的影响。未来的研究必须研究这些和其他可能的障碍，有效的RCR教学。
To examine the effects that existing courses on the responsible conduct of research (RCR) have on ethical decision making by assessing the ethicality of decisions made in response to ethical problems and the underlying processes involved in ethical decision making. These processes included how an individual thinks through ethical problems (i.e., meta-cognitive reasoning strategies) and the emphasis placed on social dimensions of ethical problems (i.e., social–behavioral responses). In 2005–2007, recruitment announcements were made, stating that a nationwide, online study was being conducted to examine the impact of RCR instruction on the ethical decision making of scientists. Recruitment yielded contacts with over 200 RCR faculty at 21 research universities and medical schools; 40 (20%) RCR instructors enrolled their courses in the current study. From those courses, 173 participants completed an ethical decision-making measure. A mixed pattern of effects emerged. The ethicality of decisions did not improve as a result of RCR instruction and even decreased for decisions pertaining to business aspects of research, such as contract bidding. Course participants improved on some meta-cognitive reasoning strategies, such as awareness of the situation and consideration of personal motivations, but declined for seeking help and considering others’ perspectives. Participants also increased in their endorsement of detrimental social–behavioral responses, such as deception, retaliation, and avoidance of personal responsibility. These findings indicated that RCR instruction may not be as effective as intended, and in fact, may even be harmful. Harmful effects might result if instruction leads students to overstress avoidance of ethical problems, be overconfident in their ability to handle ethical problems, or overemphasize their ethical nature. Future research must examine these and other possible obstacles to effective RCR instruction.